Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=587646
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com> 2010-05-03 08:12:45 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #1)
Review:
OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. Output:
not-yet-commons-ssl-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs
-> Java docs, Java-docs, Javanese
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
False positive (although you may want to change that to "API Documentation" or
something)
Done.
OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
OK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
FIX: The spec file must be written in American English.
Typo in the description: "let's" should be "lets"
Done.
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
716ac79b162dc5a964d6c7ac863def46 not-yet-commons-ssl-0.3.11.zip
716ac79b162dc5a964d6c7ac863def46 not-yet-commons-ssl-0.3.11.zip.1
OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
OK: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
OK: A package must own all directories that it creates.
OK: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
OK: Permissions on files must be set properly.
OK: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages.
OK: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
Also: the javadoc package has its files in
/usr/share/javadoc/not-yet-commons-ssl/javadocs -- that extra "javadocs"
directory shouldn't be there.
Fixed.
Is the link to commons-ssl.jar necessary at the moment? (That is, do other
packages using this expect to find something called commons-ssl.jar?)
Symlink
removed.
New sources:
Spec URL:
http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/not-yet-commons-ssl.spec
SRPM URL:
http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/not-yet-commons-ssl-0.3.11-2.fc12.src.rpm
Description:
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.